
-^/ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



014 060 462 8 



HoUinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



HB J7^1 


.C7 


i 


Copy 


1 



EXCESSIVE SAVING 



A CAUSE OF 



COMMERCIAL DISTRESS; 



BEINft A SERIES OF 



ASSAULTS UPON ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES 
OF POLITICAL ECONOMY. 



BY 



URIEL H. CROCKER. 



BOSTON: 

W. B. CLARKE AND CARRUTH, 

340 Washington Stkeet. 
1884. 






I. 



PREFACE. 



It is now about seven years since the undersigned made liis 
first attempt to bring into public notice certain views which, 
if received as true, will involve important changes in the 
accepted principles of political economy. These views were 
developed from time to time in the articles and communica- 
tions to the press contained in the following pages. Some of 
these articles and communications were declined by the peri- 
odicals and newspapers to which they were offered, and none of 
them have ever received any printed recognition of their sound- 
ness, or even of their plausibility. A firm faith, however, in 
the truth of the conclusions reached, and a strong sense of 
their importance for a proper understanding of many of the 
political and social phenomena of the present time, have led 
tlie undersigned to print this pamphlet, — in part with the 
liope that thus his suggestions and arguments may at last 
reach minds prepared to receive them, and in part as a monu- 
ment to prevent later inquirers from gaining such credit as 
may be due to the original discoverer of whatever may have 
been novel in the views here presented. 

URIEL H. CROCKER. 
Boston, 14th June, 1884. 



EXCESSIVE SAVING 



A CAUSE OF 



COMMERCIAL DISTRESS. 



The first public suggestion of the author's views was contained in 
the following communicatioa to the " Boston Daily Advertiser," and 
appeared in the issue of that paper of August 8, 1877. 



EVIL EFFECTS OF MAKING HASTE TO BE RICH. 

The general depression in business, and more especially the 
recent strikes arising out of that depression, have led to much 
consideration of the causes that have produced the results 
which we are now experiencing. Tlie following considera- 
tions are offered as presenting somewhat novel views upon this 
subject : — 

The general product of the labor of the community may be 
considered as being divided between two classes of people, — 
between the laborers and the capitalists, — between those who 
perform the manual labor and those who own and furnish the 
machinery which aids the laborer in the performance of his 
work ; who own and provide the factories, warehouses, ships, 
railroads, etc. 



6 

All the claim that the members of the first of these classes 
— the laboring class — may acquire through their own labor 
upon the labor of others is, as a general rule, employed and 
exhausted in supplying themselves and their families with 
articles needed for immediate use and consumption ; but the 
second, or capitalist, class acquires in ordinarj^ times a large 
claim upon labor in excess of what it needs for its immediate 
support and maintenance. This claim upon or control over 
labor it may use, according to its own desire, in several differ- 
ent ways. The wealthy may keep the poor busy in producing 
articles of luxury to be immediately consumed in the using ; 
or in creating more lasting means of gratifying luxurious 
tastes or fancies, as in the building of elegant dwellings or 
churches ; or, lastly, in building new factories, warehouses, 
ships, railroads, etc., as a means by which the rich may, by the 
profits of their new investments, gain new and increased power 
over labor, — may, in a word, become richer. 

There may well .be, however, a limit to the extent to which 
this last-mentioned employment of labor can profitably be 
carried. If at any given time there are enough factories, 
warehouses, ships, and railroads to supply the then existing 
demands of the community, not only can there be no profit in 
the creation of additional and uncalled-for factories, ware- 
houses, ships, and railroads, but, if these are in fact created, 
they will by competition destroy the profits of those previously 
existing, and will thus, by diminishing or stopping both the 
dividends of the capitalists and the wages of the laborers, 
diminish the ability of all to purchase the products of labor, 
and thereby, by diminishing demand, increase still more the 
excess of the actual over the needed supply. 

There seems to be good reason to suppose that this is ex- 
actly the way in which our recent depression in business has 
been brought about. By the termination of our civil war, and 
by the numerous and important improvements recently made 
in machinery, the productive power of the community had been 
very largely increased. Our wealthy classes, being of a thrifty 
and saving disposition, and wishing not to spend all their in- 
come, but to accumulate still greater wealth, sought to use a 



large portion of their control or power over labor in creating 
profitable investments for themselves. They had previously 
" made money " by building factories, stores, dwellings, rail- 
roads, etc., and they thought to make still more money by 
repeating the operation. Comparatively little harm would 
have been done if the new investments had simply turned out 
to be unprofitable, and the old ones had continued to supply to 
the rich their accustomed dividends, and to the poor their 
accustomed wages. The mischief has been that the new invest- 
ments have, by competition, ruined for the time being the old 
ones ; dividends and wages have stopped, and the income of 
all, both rich and poor, being cut down, their demands upon 
labor have been immensely diminished, and the laborer has 
been left in idleness, and without the means of procuring the 
necessaries of life. 

According to the above views it would seem that the economy 
and thrift of our wealthier classes, — their desire to grow 
richer by laying aside their surplus earnings in profitable 
investments, — instead of benefiting the community, as in ordi- 
nary times it has done, has actually, under the peculiar cir- 
cumstances of the present, produced just the opposite result, 
and that all, both rich and poor, would be more prosperous to- 
day, if the rich, instead of endeavoring to be economical and 
saving, and to make profitable investments, had employed the 
labor which they did in fact employ in building factories and 
railroads, in simply producing results out of which no profit 
was sought other than their own gratification, — for instance, 
in erecting palatial residences, or even in heaping up Egyptian 
pyramids. 

These views must be admitted to be at variance with gener- 
ally accepted theories ; but political economists are plainly at 
a loss in attempting to account for the present condition of 
affairs, and it may be that we have reached a time in the 
world's history when a new element, hitherto unnoticed be- 
cause inactive, has begun to work. It may well be that the 
possibilities of the profitable investment of capital have now 
for the first time been temporarily exhausted, and that the 
accumulative, money-getting spirit, which has heretofore done 



so much for human progress, has for a wliile no further room 
for useful action. 

U. H. C. 



The above communication to the " Advertiser" called forth in that 
paper an answer from one " E. W." and an editorial, both of which 
sought to show that " U. H. C." was entirely wrong. 

After waiting nearly a year, another attempt to draw attention to the 
subject was made, the following communication appearing in the " Bos- 
ton Daily Advertiser " of May 25, 1878. 



UNIVERSAL ECONOMY — WILL IT DO GOOD OR 

HARM ? 

The present depression in business is a fruitful topic of 
discussion in the newspapers and elsewhere, and with all dis- 
putants the favorite cause of the trouble is past exti^avagance ; 
the favorite remedy, the general practice of economy. My pres- 
ent object is to ask what this economy is that is to help us, and 
how it is to bring about that result. I suppose that when the 
people are asked to economize they are asked to spend less 
money upon luxuries and comforts for themselves and their 
families, to consume less of the products of labor. But, as 
our trouble has for a long time been that production has run 
ahead of consumption, that our factories and our mechanics 
have produced more than they could find purchasers for, that 
laborers have been idle for want of any demand for any pos- 
sible product of their labor, how is it conceivable that a still 
further diminution of the demand for those products, a still 
greater decrease in consumption, can help those that are now 
suffering ? Can it give work to the idle laborer ? Will it 
take the superfluous product of the manufacturer off his hands ? 
Will it make the business of the wholesale or of the retail 
trader more lively ? Suppose the whole community should 
economize to the greatest possible degree ; suppose we should 
all for a year wear our old clothes, eat and drink nothing 
but bread and water, and forswear all pleasures, such as 
travelling, the theatre, etc., — would this bring about a season 



9 

of prosperity ? Or should we not rather find ourselves at the 
end of that year in a condition of worse poverty and idleness 
than at its beginning? If not, why not? I wish somebody 
to explain this, I do not wish to be referred to the good 
effect of economy upon the fortunes of an individual. I admit 
that an individual may grow rich by personal economy, if 
other people will find him work enough to keep him busy, and 
will pay him for such work. One man may thus advance his 
own interests at the expense of his neighbors ; but how if his 
neighbors all adopt the same policy ? An economical shoe- 
maker will grow rich if other people will buy his shoes ; but 
how will he accumulate wealth if the whole community con- 
cludes to go barefoot in the interest of economy ? If A, B, 
and C are thrown into the water together, it may be good 
policy for A, regarding only his interest as an individual, to 
keep his own head above water by pressing B and C down ; 
but if B and C practise the same policy, and try to keep their 
respective heads up by pushing their fellows down, it is easy 
to see that the total elevation of the heads of the three will 
not amount to much. 

As, among individuals, the one who economizes may grow 
rich at the expense of tliose who are lavish or extravagant, so 
an economical nation may grow rich at the expense of other 
nations. Just at the present time the nations of Europe are 
giving the United States such an opportunity to gain at their 
expense, and if they will buy enough of our products to keep 
our people all employed, there will be an opportunity for us to 
gain by economizing. But those who extol the merits of 
economy do not limit its good effects to any such special cir- 
cumstances as those just mentioned. They claim that it is 
good for everybody ; they recommend it not as a selfish policy, 
to be practised by those who want to get ahead of their fel- 
lows, but as a policy calculated to promote the good of the 
whole. They recommend it to Europe as much as they do to 
America. They say to the whole civilized world : " You have 
been wasteful and extravagant ; you must do what the indi- 
vidual does when he has been extravagant ; you must deny 
yourselves many things you would like to have, and all will 



10 

come right in a little while." This remedy may have been an 
efficacious one in many former times of distress, but how can 
it help us noiv, when the great trouble is that people are idle ? 
If the cause of the present trouble really were past extrava- 
gance and waste, ought it not to be easy for all to find some- 
thing to do toward repairing that waste and making up for that 
extravagance ? The usual result of extravagance and waste 
is not an extra supply of goods for wliich no use can be found, 
but a scarcity of the things that have been wasted. We see 
nowhere, however, at the present time any symptoms of such 
a scarcity. If there were a scarcity of any article, how many 
laborers, now idle, would hasten to busy themselves in the 
production of that article? How much capital, now vainly 
seeking profitable employment, would hasten to supply those 
laborers with all needed factories and macliinery ? Are we 
not entitled to conclude that our troubles have not been caused 
by past extravagance, and that the remedy for those troubles 
is not to be found in the general practice of economy ? 

HERETIC. 

This communication appears to have attracted considerable notice. 
The author was informed by the editor of the "Advertiser" that 
fifteen answers to his communication were received by that paper, all of 
which controverted his arguments and conclusions. Three of these 
answers were printed in the " Advertiser," and an editorial article 
summed up the different views that had been presented, and concluded 
that " Heretic " had gone badly astray. In answer to these criticisms 
the next communication was written; but the " Advertiser" had had for 
the time enough of the subject, and the communication was committed 
to its waste basket. 



11 



THE EFFECT OF ECONOMY. 

I DO not see that you or your correspondents answer the 
question that I proposed. I have made no question as to the 
beneficial results of economy in the past, both to the indi- 
vidual and to the world at large. I have made no question as 
to the possibility of gain to be derived by an individual from 
personal economy now. My inquiry was for some practical 
explanation of the process by which general economy will help 
the world under its present peculiar circumstances. I sug- 
gested that the chief trouble at present is that laboring people 
cannot find employment, and that any increased economy on 
the part of the community will naturally tend, by decreasing 
consumption, to increase rather than to diminish this trouble. 
This is a result which lies on the surface, — the dullest mind 
can perceive it, — I ask for an explanation of the more hidden 
working of things by which this result may be prevented and 
the opposite one produced. One of your correspondents says 
that when the general love of economy induces people to go 
without shoes, the shoemaker " must seek some other employ- 
ment." But under such circumstances as the present, wher- 
ever he turns, he will find that in each field of employment the 
general economy has made fewer laborers necessary, — that 
there are superfluous tailors, hatters, grocers, teamsters, and 
farm hands, as well as superfluous shoemakers. Another of 
your correspondents says that the answer to the question, what 
the superfluous shoemakers shall do, is " easy." " They have 
their own wants to satisfy, they can turn to producing for them- 
selves." Producing what ? Are they to endeavor to return 
to the mode of life of that long past time when a man and his 
family supplied all their own wants directly by their own 
labor, fed themselves with the products of their own tillage, 
and clothed themselves in homespun ? Even if such a return 
to the habits of his ancestors were possible for the laborer of 



12 

to-day, would it be an advance or a retrograde movement ? 
Would not such a course be simply an abandonment, by those 
who were driven to adopt it, of the advantages and comforts 
of modern civilization ? Indeed, would not general economy, 
if pushed to an extreme, amount simply to the general practice 
of denying ourselves the enjoyment of those comforts and 
charms of life which we owe to modern civilization ? 

It is said however that, if we all economized, — if we ceased 
to consume as much as we do of the products of labor, — we 
might employ our labor in adding to the world's " stock of 
wealth." This sounds well, but I think I am entitled to ask 
how this is to be done at the present time ? After all the 
shoes and clothes that there is any demand for have been pro- 
duced, will it increase the wealth of the world to lay up stores 
of those articles, to moulder and decay before they can be 
used ? Will it increase the wealth of the world to build fac- 
tories, railroads, and ships, that must be left to ruin and decay 
because there is no work for them to do? If there is a pos- 
sibility of increasing our stock of wealth at the present time, 
how is it that the idle laborers, who are now so plenty, — that 
the idle capital wliich is now so abundant, — do not set about 
the work ? The answer to this question involves the solution 
of the whole difficulty. If any man, who has sufficient means 
to meet the expense, will build a new house for himself and 
thereby give many laboring men employment, he certainly will 
not be " economizing," but he will increase the world's " stock 
of wealth." Economy would teach him to remain satisfied 
with his old house, and not to spend money for a new one. 
Economy frowns on his proceeding, but he adds a new house 
to the world's stock of wealth, and gives employment to 
laborers who would otherwise be idle, and, by the wages that 
he pays to those laborers, he enables them to consume the 
products of the labors of others, who are in their turn kept in 
employment ; and thus the good effects of his uneconomical 
conduct spread in ever widening circles through the whole 
community. Let it be distinctly understood, however, that I 
do not claim that it would not be better for the community 
that the labor expended in building the supposed house should 



13 

have been expended in erecting a factory, or in building a ship 
or a raih'oad, if there were not already a superfluity of those 
articles, — that it would not be better that the money of the 
capitalist should find what we may call a " profitable invest- 
ment," if any such investment were to be had. But to-day 
there is a dearth of such investments. A new factory not 
only produces no profits, but, by competition, destroys the 
profits of the old ones. Superfluous articles that nobody 
wants are not wealth. Let the economist point out, if he 
can, how the idle thousands can, to-day, be employed in pro- 
ducing " wealth," except through such uneconomical measures 
as the creation of new comforts and new luxuries for those 
who are able to pay for them. 

HERETIC. 



A more labored attempt to state the author's views was next made, 
resulting in the following article, which appeared in the "Atlantic 
Monthly " for December, 1878. 

SAVING VERSUS SPENDING. 

THE " HARD TIMES : " TWO THEORIES AS TO THE CAUSE AND 
THE REMEDY. 

When the present " hard times " are discussed, two wholly 
antagonistic theories are advanced as to their cause and as to 
their remedy. On the one hand, it is claimed that the real 
cause of our trouble is that we have been extravagant and 
wasteful, and that, in order to make good the waste of the 
past, we should now be as saving and economical as possible.^ 

1 Thus in an article by Prof. Bonaray Price in the " Contemporary Eeview " 
for April 1877, (p. 787), we find the statement that the cause of the general depres- 
sion in business "is one and one only, — over-spending, over-consuming, destroying 
more wealth than is reproduced ; and its necessary consequence, poverty. This is 
the real fons mail, the root of all the disorder and the suffering, the creator of the 
inevitable sequence of cause and effect." 



14 

On the other hand, it is said that the cause of our present 
distress cannot be past extravagance and waste, for such 
causes ought to lead to a general scarcity, rather than abun- 
dance, of the products of labor ; that the most peculiar and 
conspicuous symptoms of the present distress are the large 
stocks of all kinds of goods which have been waiting for con- 
sumers, and the large numbers of people who have been un- 
able to find employment ; that saving and economy on the part 
of those who are not compelled to such a course by poverty 
will increase rather than diminish the amount of unsalable 
articles and the number of the unemployed, and will injure 
our condition rather than improve it ; and that, consequently, 
a liberal expenditure of public and private resources is not to 
be condemned, but encouraged. In order to judge fairly as to 
the respective merits of these two theories, it is well to con- 
sider what the true purpose of saving is, and to what extent 
the policy of saving may reasonably be carried. 



FUTURE SPENDING THE ONLY RATIONAL OBJECT OF PRESENT 

SAVING. 

Prom the point of view of the political economist, there is 
no virtue in saving except so far as some material benefit may 
be expected to result from it, and it is impossible to suggest 
any such benefit other than the acquirement of the means, 
either for ourselves or for others, of future spending. We 
refrain from consuming to-day all the fruits of to-day's labors 
only that we, or those in whose welfare we are interested, 
may be able to enjoy the benefit of an increased consump- 
tion in the future. All the saving of the generations of the 
past has been a profitless loss of comfort and enjoyment, 
unless the present and the future are to derive from the results 
of such saving increased comfort and increased enjoyment. 
And so, also, it is profitless and unreasonable to save in the 
present, except that there may be greater opportunity to enjoy 
and spend and consume in the future. 



15 



THE MEANS BY WHICH PRESENT SAVING AIDS FUTURE 
SPENDING. 

If, then, we conclude that the only reasonable object of 
saving is the acquirement of the means of future spending, we 
are led next to consider the ways in which saving can promote 
this object. 

The simplest way, of course, is by the accumulation and 
storage for future use of food, clothing, etc. At the present 
day tliere is comparatively little room for the operation of this 
method. Formerly it was wise to lay up large stores of grain, 
for example, in order to guard against a bad season ; but now, 
when any portion of the world can call upon all the other 
portions for a supply of any article of which it may find itself 
temporarily in need, the accumulation and storage of more 
than a year's supply of any article of daily consumption is 
ordinarily useless, and tends, on the whole, to loss rather than 
to gain. 

The principal and most effective method of providing by 
present saving for future spending is through what economists 
have called " productive consumption ; " that is, by employing 
labor, not directly in the creation of articles for immediate 
use, but in the creation of articles which will be the cause and 
means of further production, as in the making of tools and ma- 
chinery with which labor may be aided in its work and 
rendered more efficient* Plows and other simple agricultural 
implements were among the earlier results of productive con- 
sumption ; factories, railroads, and steamships are among the 
more important of the later ones. Through these means sav- 
ing, by immensely increasing all kinds of production, has im- 
mensely increased all kinds of consumption, and the self-denial 
of our ancestors has given us all our factories, railroads, and 
steamships, and has enabled us of to-day to enjoy ten or a 
lumdred fold the comforts and luxuries that would have been 
possible had that saving not taken place. 



16 



THE LIMIT OP THE POWER OF SAVING TO AID FUTURE SPENDING 
THROUGH PRODUCTIVE CONSUMPTION. 

Productive consumption being found to be the chief means 
through which saving can accomplish beneficial results, it next 
becomes important to consider whether there is any limit to 
the good that saving may effect in this way, and, if there is 
such a limit, to determine where it lies. But as we have seen 
that the only rational object^ of productive consumption is the 
creation of articles of ordinary or unproductive consumption, 
the extent to which the former can reasonably and profitably 
be carried must be limited by the existing or anticipated 
amount of the latter ; and as the unproductive consumption of 
a community is always dependent upon and limited by, first, 
the desire to consume unproductively, and, secondly, the abil- 
ity to obtain the articles for such consumption, the extent to 
which productive consumption can at any given time be profit- 
ably carried must be limited in the same way. 

As society is at present constituted, however, the unproduc- 
tive consumption of a large part of the community is limited 
solely by the extent of their ability to obtain the articles of 
consumption, without reference to the extent of their desire to 
consume. Large numbers of the poor are compelled by tlieir 
necessities to consume unproductively all that their wages enable 
them to purchase, and it is chiefly the wealthier classes whose 
will or choice has any power to influence, at any given time, the 
amount of unproductive, and through it the profitable amount 
of productive, consumption. The wealthy may, according to 
their own desires, claim for themselves more or less of the 
comforts and luxuries of life ; and if all who have this power 
should choose to deny themselves all comforts and all luxuries, 
and to restrict themselves to absolute necessities, the unpro- 
ductive and, as a necessary consequence, the productive con- 
sumption of the world would, both of them, be greatly reduced. 
There would be comparatively little use or occasion for facto- 

' The final, not the inimerliate, object is of course here referred to. 



17 

ries, railroads, and steamboats, or for any of those things 
which the wealthy seek to own as " profitable investments/' 
It follows that if the rich, either from a desire to grow richer, 
or from a desire to favor productive, as more useful or more 
worthy than unproductive, consumption, should generally 
adopt a policy of extreme self-denial, they would defeat their 
own ends, and, by destroying the opportunities for profitable 
productive consumption, make themselves poorer instead of 
richer than before. 

EEVIEW. STATEMENT OP THEORETICAL CONCLUSIONS. 

We have seen that saving is to be approved only so far as 
it leads to subsequent spending, and that it does largely 
accomplish this result, mainly by affording opportunity for 
productive consumption ; but that, as the extent to which pro- 
ductive consumption can at any given time be profitably car- 
ried, is limited in a great degree by the extent to which men, 
and especially the richer classes, abstain from saving, it is 
possible that this much-extolled policy of saving may be carried 
to such a point as to destroy the efficiency of the principal 
means by and through which it can promote its only rational 
object, future spending; and that, consequently, when carried 
to this point, it ceases to effect any good result, but rather 
tends to defeat the only ends for which it may rationally be 
practised at all. 

APPLICATION OP THEORY TO THE PACTS. 

Having shown theoretically that saving, though generally 
beneficial and worthy to be encouraged, may possibly be carried 
too far, — so far indeed that its benefits will be changed to 
injuries, — we are now prepared to examine the circumstances 
of the present times, in order to learn whether the indications 
are that the tendency to save is to-day deficient or in excess. 

It is very evident that productive consumption is now and 
for some considerable time has been quite unprofitable ; that 
factories, railroads, steamships, and warehouses bring very 
small returns to their owners ; that the market-rate of interest 
has been, and still is, unprecedentedly low ; and that capital 

3 



18 

has long been wholly at a loss as to how it should employ itself. 
These facts surely indicate that the field for profitable produc- 
tive consumption has been for the time nearly exhausted ; that 
its temporary limit has been nearly reached ; and that a larger 
amount of unproductive consumption is required before that 
limit can be advanced. The correctness of this conclusion is 
plainly shown, also, by the surplus stocks of all kinds of pro- 
ducts and manufactures which are now, and have long been, 
waiting for consumers, and by the enforced idleness of the 
thousands of laboring men who have found that their labor 
was not in demand for the supply of either productive or un- 
productive consumption. Then, again, the hard times have 
been felt most seriously in England, America, and Germany, 
while France has been substantially exempt from them; the 
explanation being that France, having had its territory devas- 
tated by war, and its capital depleted by the subsidy paid to 
Germany, has had large room for productive consumption, and 
small capital to devote to it ; and hence productive consump- 
tion has there been very extensive and very profitable. All 
available capital has been employed, and the laborers liave 
all been busy ; those who have been released from supplying 
unproductive consumption having been in demand for the 
supply of a profitable productive consumption. Germany, 
however, undertook to grow rich by devoting the millions of 
the French subsidy to productive consumption, which was 
thereby carried to such an excess that its profit was destroyed. 
And thus we find a simple explanation of the otherwise inex- 
plicable mystery of the prosperity of the vanquished and the 
distress of the victorious nation, after their recent tremendous 
struggle. 

RECENT EXPERIENCE OP THE UNITED STATES. 

The history of the United States during and since the war 
affords an illustration of the way in which productive con- 
sumption may be overdone, — built up to an extent too great 
to be supported by its always necessary substructure of unpro- 
ductive consumption. During the war unproductive consump- 
tion was carried on to an unprecedented degree, and the effect 



19 

was that the opportunities for productive consumption also 
were very largely increased, and, by consequence, rendered 
very profitable. There was an urgent call for every man's 
labor. No one who wished to work was allowed to remain 
idle. Every man who wished to save, to accumulate wealth, 
found all about him opportunities for so doing. These extra- 
ordinary inducements to exertion kept every man's industry 
up to the highest point, so that the production of the country 
was marv'ellous, and, although there was an immense waste in 
the war, there was still a large surplus of products, — suffi- 
cient to enable the great mass of the community to consume 
much unproductively for their own immediate comfort, and 
yet to leave the country, at the termination of the war, at least 
as full of buildings, factories, and railroads as it was at the 
beginning. 

When at length the war ceased, everything was arranged to 
meet an immense demand for unproductive consumption. If 
our people could then have said to themselves, '■ Now that this 
great waste of the war is at an end, we can enjoy much more 
of the comforts and luxuries of life than before; indeed, we 
must do so if we would keep our machinery employed and our 
people busy," — if they could have said this, and could have 
acted accordingly, all would have gone on smoothly. But in 
fact they, or those of them who by their wealth had the power 
to act according to their own desires, did say, in effect, " We 
have got rid of this sad waste of the war ; we have been get- 
ting rich in spite of the waste, but now our possibilities of 
enriching ourselves are far better than before ; we will not sit 
down just yet to enjoy ourselves, but will postpone for a while 
our days of enjoyment and of ease, in order that we may first 
add a little to our wealth." The failure of this attempt of our 
rich men to become richer lies before us to-day. Their facto- 
ries had been very profitable, and they sought to increase their 
profits by building more factories. Their railroads had re- 
turned them large dividends, and they sought more dividends 
of the same kind by more railroads of the same kind. But it 
never occurred to them that unless a new unproductive con- 
sumption arose, to take the place of that which had ceased with 



20 

the war, even tlie former amount of productive consumption 
would be too great to supply the wants of the people, and that, for 
the profitable support of their neiv factories and netv railroads, 
a still further increase of unproductive consumption would be 
needed. They contributed, as has been said, but little them- 
selves to this needed increase of unproductive consumption, 
and as the poor found but little opportunity or possibility of 
contributing to it, that increase was never brought about; and 
it soon began to be perceived that productive consumption was 
overdone, and that its profit was for the time ruined and lost. 
Factories of all kinds produced immense stocks of goods which 
could not be disposed of; their owners competed with each 
other, and sold their goods at less than cost, and finally, in 
many cases, shut up their factories and discharged their hands. 
Then we began to have an actually diminished unproductive 
consumption, where we had needed an increased one. The rich, 
having lost their " income," felt that they must " economize." 
Tiie poor, having lost their employment, were forced to do so. 
This universal economy increased, by its reaction, the original 
trouble, and thus we went on from bad to worse, until it seemed 
that we were on a road that led, without' any turning, straight 
to destruction. To-day, however, we are hoping, as indeed we 
have hoped before, that we perceive signs of a change. The 
nations of Europe, by their wars and preparations for war, 
have been indulging in an increased amount of unproductive 
consumption, and have been calling upon us to supply the 
materials for it. The farmers of the West and some of the 
manufacturers of the East have begun to feel again that they 
may increase their expenditures for daily comforts and daily 
luxuries ; and as their demand for such things increases, we 
may hope that the machinery of production will get once more 
in profitable motion, and, by employing those now unemployed, 
will call forth still further demands for articles of daily con- 
sumption. As daily consumption increases, the labor of all 
men will gradually be brought into action, and we shall have 
once more a busy and happy people, all at work, and all 
enjoying the fruit of their labor ; and not, as we have seen 
them within the past few years, one half idle, while the other 



21 

half were engaged in a futile attempt to save and lay up for 
the future more than the constitution of human affairs allowed 
them to accumulate with any profit either to themselves or to 
others. 

EXPEEIENCE OF THE DUTCH AND THK ENGLISH. 

Upon reviewing the history of the past, we find that the 
present is not the first time that productive consumption has 
approached near its limit, — not the first time that the thrift 
of a people has been so great that they have nearly exhausted 
the field of profitable productive consumption. In former 
times the Dutch were a very energetic, industrious, and thrifty 
people, and in their days the machinery for aiding production 
was comparatively limited. Their means of productive con- 
sumption were confined mostly to the building of ships and 
the carrying on of foreign commerce ; and they were so desir- 
ous of acquiring wealth that they exhausted their opportunities 
for productive consumption to such a degree that their in- 
vestments produced for them but a very small percentage of 
profit, as is shown by the low rate of interest that ruled among 
them. 

So also the immense wealth that England has acquired by 
the thrift of her richer classes has made her home productive 
consumption, for many years, bring so little profit that the 
rate of interest that borrowers can afford to pay, and that 
lenders are glad to take, has long been very low. In fact the 
greater part of the surplus wealth of England has for many 
years been applied to increasing the productive or unproduc- 
tive consumption of foreign nations, induced thereto by their 
often illusory promises of future return for present benefits. 

EFFECT OF MACHINERY TO INCREASE THE POWER OF 
PRODUCTION. 

The great improvements in machinery and in the means 
of communication and of transportation, Avhich have been 
brought about within the last fifty years, have marvellously in- 
creased mankind's power of production. A comparatively small 



22 

number of laborers could to-day supply all the wants of man- 
kind, if those wants had not, within those fifty years, largely 
increased ; and it is only because those wants — that is, the 
demand for consumption — have largely increased that the 
majority of mankind are not to-day idle instead of busy. That 
demand, hovv^ever, has not kept pace with the supply, for the 
reason that the power of increasing the demand has come 
principally to the rich, and but slowly to the poor; and this 
power of the rich has, by their choice, been turned to the 
increase of the demand for productive consumption, — for 
factories, railroads, and warehouses. This, as we have seen, 
they have carried to such an extent that productive consump- 
tion has been overdone, and its profits reduced to a very small 
percentage. 

It seems probable, indeed, that in the future the rate of 
profit of productive consumption will be permanently dimin- 
ished, wealth increasing, on the whole, more rapidly than the 
possibilities of its profitable investment ; and as this result is 
developed, we may expect that wealth will turn itself more to 
the acquisition of things which, although not productive of 
income, are a permanent source of comfort or pleasure to their 
possessors ; that there will be an added tendency to spend 
large sums in the purchase of land, in the erection of resi- 
dences, and in the purchase of paintings and other works of 
art. And although the opportunities for increased unproduc- 
tive consumption come first to the rich, they must extend 
speedily to the poor. All that is needed is that the poor shall 
be kept busy, and the rest will take care of itself. 

Just at the present moment the poor are strongly tempted to 
try desperate remedies for the improvement of their condition. 
Tliey see a world overflowing with good things ; they are 
anxious and willing by their labor to increase the supply of 
those good things, and to earn the right to share in the enjoy- 
ment of them ; but they are forbidden to touch them, although 
they are going to waste before their eyes. What wonder that 
they think that there is something rotten in a constitution of 
affairs that brings about such a result? What wonder that 
they are ready for desperate remedies ? But let us have once 



23 

more the work of consumption and production in full action, 
— a world full of busy men consuming the products of their 
own labor, — and the talk of communism, instead of being, as 
now, largely prevalent among the laboring classes, will again 
be confined to a small number of persons, partly theorists, 
and partly men who are discontented by reason of failure 
caused by their own incapacity or folly. 

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS. 

The preceding arguments would seem to show that, in the 
present constitution of society, the world, in order to be pros- 
perous and happy, must be busy both in producing and in con- 
suming the products of its own labors ; and that if those who 
have by wealth acquired a control over labor do not use that 
labor, either selfishly in ministering to their own present com- 
fort and enjoyment, or generously in ministering to the com- 
fort and enjoyment of others, we shall necessarily have a more 
or less idle world, in which the rich will not, and the poor can 
not, enjoy themselves as they reasonably might. Mankind's 
power of production is now immense compared with what it 
has been in the past, and consequently its power and possibil- 
ity of enjoyment of life are equally large ; and it is certainly 
an important question whether mankind may wisely and prof- 
itably avail itself of all its varied possibilities of rational 
enjoyment, or whether its present duty lies chiefly in the 
direction of self-denial. The latter doctrine is continually 
preached to us, and we are constantly told that we must deny 
ourselves present enjoyments if we would regain our lost pros- 
perity. But if the arguments adduced above are sound, there 
is to-day neither merit nor prospective benefit in increased 
saving ; there is nothing but evil and Ic^s in abstaining, more 
than we have been and are doing, from the consumption and 
enjoyment of the good things of life.^ 

^ The following references to works on political economy ai'c given for the 
benefit of any who may wish to read what has been written by others upon the 
subject considered in the above article. Much of what is referred to below was 
written with special reference to the condition of England after the termination of 
its wars with Napoleon, — the condition of England at that time having been very 



24 

similar to the recent condition of the United States, and the problem, then as now, 
being to explain a general distress in the midst of a general overplus of all kinds 
of products. 

Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith: Book I., chap, ix., Of the profits of 
stock: Book II., chap, iii., Of the accumulation of capital, or of productive and 
unproductive labor. Principles of Political Economy, by Rev. T. R. Malthus : 
chap, vii., s. 3, Of accumulation, or the saving from revenue to add to capital, 
considered as a stimulus to the increase of wealth ; s. 10, Application of some of 
the preceding principles to the distress of the laboring classes since 1815, with 
general observations. Political Economy, by Dr. Thomas Chalmers : chap, iii., 
On the increase and limit of capital ; chap, v.. On the possibility of a general glut. 
Treatise on Political Economy, by Jean-Baptiste Say : Book I., chap, xi.. Of the 
formation and multiplication of capital; chap, xv., Of the demand or market for 
products. Letters to Mr. Malthus on various subjects of Political Economy, par- 
ticularly on the Causes of the General Stagnation of Commerce, by Jean-Baptiste 
Say. Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, by David Ricardo : chap, 
xxi.. Effect of accumulation on profits and interest; chap, vi., On profits. Ele- 
ments of Political Economy, by James Mill: chap, iv., s. 1, Of productive and 
unproductive Consumption; s. 3, That Consumption is co-extensive with produc- 
tion. Principles of Political Economy, by John Stuart Mill : vol. i.. Book I., 
chap, v., Fundamental propositions on capital, s. 3 ; chap, xi., Law of increase of 
capital, s. 4 ; vol. ii.. Book IIF., chap, xiv., Excess of supply ; Book IV., chap, 
iv., Of the tendency of profits to a minimum; chap. v. Consequences of the ten- 
dency of profits to a minimum. Chapters on Political Economy, by Prof. Bonamy 
Price : chap, iv.. Capital. The Economy of Consumption, by Robert Scott 
Moffat. Principles of Political Economy, by J. R. M'Culloch : Pt. I., chap, ii., 
s. 3, Accumulation and employment of capital; chap, vii.. Causes of gluts; Pt. 
III., chap, vii.. Circumstances which determine the average rate of profits ; Pt. IV., 
Consumption of wealth. Article on Industrial Reconstruction, by Edward At- 
kinson, in the International Review for July-August, 1878. 



25 



The preceding article in the " Atlantic Monthly" elicited two com- 
munications in the " Contributors' Club," in the numbers of that 
magazine for March and April, 1879. Both of these communications 
sought to expose what they claimed to be the fallacies of the author 
of " Saving versus Spending," and the author can now recall no printed 
notice of that article, however brief, that treated it with any favor or 
respect. 

Not entirely discouraged by the reception given to his article, the 
author ventured again, in February, 1880, to write and offer to the 
editor of the " Atlantic " a second article, which, however, did not suc- 
ceed in obtaining admission to the columns of that magazine. This 
second article was entitled " The Return of Prosperity," and is here 
given in full, as originally written. 



THE RETURN OP PROSPERITY. 

In an article entitled " Saving versus Spending," wliieli 
appeared in the " Atlantic Monthly " for December, 1878, an 
attempt was made to prove the fallacy of the generally ac- 
cepted theory, that there is no limit to the extent to which 
saving may profitably be carried. Arguments were also 
adduced tending to show that the area of the field for the 
profitable investment of capital is always limited by and de- 
pendent upon the existing amount of unproductive consump- 
tion, and that the natural effect of an overcrowding of this 
field is to diminish consumption, both productive and unpro- 
ductive, and to cause a general depression in business, and 
idleness and suffering among the laboring classes. 

When that article was written, business in this country was 
sadly depressed, — large numbers of laborers were out of em- 
ployment, and there was only the beginning of a hope for 
improvement. Now that hope seems to be in process of 
realization, — the whole country appears to be in the full tide 
of success ; the poor man finds again that his labor is .in 
active demand, and the capitalist discovers that his invest- 
ments are beginning once more to produce profits. We 
propose in the present article briefly to examine into the 
manner in which this great change has been brought about, 

4 



26 

and to discover what further changes we may expect in the 
future. 

In the article before referred to, it was claimed that the 
immediate cause of the " hard times " was not, as was gener- 
ally supposed, that there had been too much, but rather too 
little spending, and that what was specially needed was that 
in some way the general consumption of the products of labor 
should be increased, and thereby the demand for labor ex- 
tended and general industry substituted for general idleness. 
Just such an increase in consumption and in industry, as was 
then claimed to be needful, we have within the last two years 
seen actually taking place. Apparently the primary increase 
in the consumption of the products of this country came from 
abroad. The nations of Europe found that they had need for 
much of our crops and for many of our articles of manufact- 
ure, and the demand arising out of these needs gave the 
initial impulse that was requisite to start us in our career of 
prosperity, — it not only put money into the pockets of our 
farmers and manufacturers, but it also, by the increased need 
of transportation, gave employment to our railroads and to 
our carriers of all kinds. Hence it resulted that farm owners 
and farm laborers, factory owners and factory hands, owners 
of railroad stock and railroad employees, — all these and 
many others found themselves with an increase of income, — 
of the power of spending and consuming ; a large portion 
of which increase they promptly availed themselves of. Their 
increased expenditures gave employment and income to many 
others in various walks of life, and the prosperity and in- 
creased expenditures of these extended again to a still larger 
circle, till the good effect has spread to all classes, and to-day 
we find on all hands general industry and general prosperity ; 
railroads and factories reporting increased profits, — mer- 
chants and storekeepers finding their business gaining not 
only in amount but in profit, — mechanics and laborers finding 
regular employment and regular wages, -r— and all, rich and 
poor, spending freely out of their increased means. The 
general increase of unproductive consumption thus caused 
has widened the field for productive consumption, — for 



27 

dividend paying investments. New factories, new railroads, 
and new buildings are called for on all sides ; capital no longer 
is at a loss where to place itself, but is everywhere in demand, 
and is attracted by the most alluring promises of almost 
fabulous gains, and, like the mercury in a barometer after 
a storm, the current rate of interest rises. 

Such has been the course of events in the past few years. 
What may we expect in the years to come ? It would seem 
that, if we do not waste our golden opportunities by indulging 
in follies, such as wars, riots, and revolutions, a great change 
for the better in the general condition of the whole people 
may at once be looked for. Some twenty years have now 
passed without any very marked advance in the comforts and 
luxuries of living. In these twenty years, however, very 
many labor-saving inventions have been made, and the means 
for the interchange of products between different parts of the 
world have been greatly improved. Tlie world might to-day 
be supplied with, all the comforts and luxuries that it enjoyed 
twenty years ago with an expenditure of two thirds, if not of 
one half, of the labor then required. For twenty years the 
productive powers of this country have been largely and 
rapidly increasing, while from several causes, such as the war 
of the rebellion, and the over-investment of capital and the 
consequent general idleness that followed it, but, little of the 
increased enjoyment of life that should have resulted from 
these increased powers, has been felt. Now, it seems probable 
that, with universal industry directed to useful ends, we are 
about to leap at once into the full enjoyment of the beneficial 
effects of powers that have for years been rapidly and largely 
expanding, without producing their legitimate effects to any- 
considerable extent. 

What new comforts and luxuries this great increase in the 
productiveness of labor will bring to our people, and in what 
manner the new good things of life will be distributed, it is not 
easy to say. On some points, however, we may indulge in 
plausible anticipations. It would seem that better and more 
varied food will be placed within the reach of all classes. 
The immense numbers of cattle raised in the West and the 



28 

extent to which their transportation is even now carried, 
show that beef will henceforth be a common article of food 
to thousands to whom it has hitherto been unknown. Fruits, 
such as strawberries, grapes, peaches, and pears, are now 
spread broadcast over the land in such quantities that their 
use can no longer be confined, as a luxury, to the rich. In 
the matter of clothing, also, we may expect a great advance in 
the condition of the poorer classes. Machinery now creates 
all articles of clothing of so good a quality and with so little 
aid from human labor, that it will take but a small fraction of 
the wages of a laboring man to clothe himself and his family, 
not only warmly and comfortably, but also with a regard to 
appearances which heretofore could be thought of only by the 
rich. In other matters also, besides food and clothing, we 
see that the tendency of the times is to an improvement in 
the condition of the masses, and that it will by no means be 
within the power of the rich to monopolize the gains that 
should be distributed among all. The great movements of the 
present day are towards improvements that affect all classes. 
Aqueducts, sewers, public parks, and horse railroads may be 
mentioned as among the most important of the new things 
which command the attention of the public, and these are no 
exclusive luxuries of the rich, but the common comforts and 
delights of the whole people. 

As, in the years to come, the comforts and luxuries within 
the reach of the laborers' wages increase, and as capital grows 
faster than the field for its profitable investment extends, so 
that the percentage of income from accumulated capital dim- 
inishes, the capitalist and the laborer will find themselves 
daily approaching more nearly to an equality. Relatively to 
each other, the laborer's wages will increase in purchasing 
power, while the capitalist's income will diminish. The power 
of each class to spend, — to employ the labor of others, — will 
approach an equality, and society will make a decided advance 
towards that ideal condition in which each man's power to 
command the comforts and luxuries of life will depend, not 
on the chance of birth and inherited wealth, but on the ex- 
tent of his own powers and of his own willingness to produce. 



/ 



29 

by tlie labor of his hands or of his brain, things useful to 
his fellow-men, — that condition of society in which the degree 
of a man's worldly prosperity will depend on his own ability 
and industry. 



In October, 1883, the United States Senate Committee on Education 
and Labor gave in Boston several hearings to persons desiring to present 
views on the subject which the committee had been appointed to consider. 
The following letter -was sent to Hon. H. W. Blair, the Chairman of this 
Committee. 

Boston, 21st Oct., 1883. 
Senator Blair, 

Dear Sir, — Understanding through the papers that you 
are not unwilling to receive written suggestions relative to 
the subject of Capital and Labor, I venture to write this short 
abstract of certain views of my own. 

When we speak of Capital in connection with Labor, we 
generally have in mind that portion of Capital which seeks a 
profitable investment, — that which the owner does not invest 
in a dwelling, for instance, for his own use, but in a factory or 
railroad which shall bring him annual returns. 

No investment of capital can be profitable, — i. e. produce 
annual returns for the owner, — except so far as the people are 
spending. If the poor, through their poverty, ca7i^t spend, and 
the rich, through their desire to be richer, won''t spend, the 
field for the profitable investment of capital must be very 
small. The call for the products of the factories will be limited 
to comparatively few articles, — the railroads will have but 
little merchandise and but few passengers to transport. Under 
these circumstances capital will be abundant, but unable to 
find any employment that will return a profit. At such a time 
the capitalist can of course produce articles which he can dis- 
pose of in cliarity, but nothing which he can sell at a profit. 
Consequently he will cease to employ his capital, and laborers 
will find that they have no work to do. We shall have " hard 
times," — hard for all, rich and poor, — the rich will be with- 
out income, and the poor without employment. 



30 

One conclusion to be deduced from the foregoing is tliis, — 
tl)at the larger the wages that the laborer receives, the more 
he can spend, and the greater consequently will be the field for 
the profitable investment of capital. On the other hand, the 
smaller the wages of the laborer, the less he can spend, and the 
smaller will be the field for the profitable investment of capital. 
In other words, the more generous capital is to labor, the more 
will capital itself prosper ; and the more niggardly it is, the 
more it attempts to monopolize the profits, the more likely it 
will be to find that all profits have disappeared. 

Jay Gould doubtless feared that his dividends would cease if 
the recent strike of the telegraph operators should succeed, 
but their success would have meant an increased expenditure 
by many thousands of people, an increased demand for many 
articles, the supply of which would have afforded Gould and 
his friends new fields in which to seek for profits, and would 
also have given to his railroads, already built, more work to 
do. Thus, by the success of the strike. Jay Gould might him- 
self have gained more than he could have lost. 

The true interests of capital and labor, then, are not adverse 
but harmonious. Each, in helping the other, advances its own 
welfare. Each, in attacking the other, injures itself. 

Hoping that you will be able to find time to read with care 
what I have written, I am. 

Yours respectfully, 

URIEL H. CROCKER. 



Shortly afterwards the following appeared in the " Boston Daily Adver- 
tiser" of Nov. 24, 1883. 



OVER-PRODUCTION. 

A continually recurring subject of discussion is the alleged 
over-production in various branches of business. The general 
testimony seems to be that at the present time the principal 



31 

branches of manufacture in this country have been producing 
in excess of the demand for consumption, and tliat, consequently, 
factories are being closed and laborers thrown out of employ- 
ment. It is usually assumed, however, that a general over- 
production in all branches of labor is an impossibility, the 
argument of Mill to prove the impossibility of a " general 
glut " being accepted as conclusive and final. No matter how 
strongly the facts may seem to support him who argues the 
possibility of general over-production, the political economist 
complacently waives him aside as one who suffers himself to 
be bewildered by a long-ago exploded fallacy. The political 
economist will admit that there is an over-production of certain 
articles, but he insists that, at the same time, there must be, 
and consequently is, an under-production of other articles. It 
is useless to ask him what those articles are, the demand for 
which is in excess of the supply, or why the shrewd owners 
of the immense amount of capital seeking profitable employ- 
ment cannot discover and supply this demand. He is wholly 
undisturbed by the apparent inconsistency of the facts with 
his theory, and plants himself, as on an immovable rock, on 
the argument of Mill. 

It is often well to re-examine the foundations of our beliefs ; 
and it may not be a waste of time to test the validity of the 
arguments of even so acute a reasoner as Mill. I propose, at 
any rate, to make the attempt. 

Mill's argument to prove the impossibility of general over, 
production is in substance this, — that no man will labor to 
produce any article unless he either wishes to consume that 
article himself, or is in want of some other article for which he 
can exchange it. Men do not, to any appreciable extent, labor 
for the mere pleasure of laboring. They labor either because 
they want the result for itself, or to exchange it for something 
which they do want. It is only an unsatisfied want that can 
induce a man to labor, — there can be no product of labor 
unless there was a want that induced the labor; and thus 
production must ever correspond to demand, and can never 
outrun it, and general over-production is in the nature of 
things impossible. 



32 

This argument is very plausible, but it overlooks one im- 
portant consideration. A large portion of the want, of the 
demand of the community at the present day, is of a peculiar 
character. Men want what we call " profitable investments." 
In return for what they produce directly by their labor, or indi- 
rectly, by the use of their capital, they wish to acquire some- 
thing tliat shall be to them a continuing source of income. 
Factories go on producing, not wholly because the owners and 
the laborers want otlier " consumable articles," such as food, 
clothes, etc. If this were so, Mill's argument would be unan- 
swerable ; demand and supply would be equivalent. But an 
important want, both of capitalist and of laborer, is the want 
to build and own more factories, — the desire for the opportu- 
nity and ability to produce more, that thereby they may acquire 
more income. Thus we find that the demand that has led to 
production, instead of being wholly a demand for consumption, 
has been in great part a desire for increased production. I do 
not overlook a certain increased consumption in the building of 
the new factory ; but that is only incidental to the great end 
sought, — the increase of production with a view to the increase 
of income. What, however, becomes of Mill's argument when 
we once see clearly that production is induced, not only by the 
desire to consume, but by the desire to increase production. 
So far as it is induced by the latter cause, it may certainly get 
in advance of consumption ; in other words, it may become 
general over-production, — it may cause what has been called 
a general glut. 

So much for the theory of the matter, — the practical work- 
ing of these principles is more easily traced. Let us assume a 
time of general prosperity, when business is thriving and goods 
find ready purchasers, when there is plenty of work for every 
one who wants work, and for capital ready employment with 
liberal profits. But a spirit of thrift is abroad ; the desire to 
accumulate wealth is very strong, especially among the richer 
classes. The consumption of the poor is limited by their small 
wages, the consumption of the rich is limited by their desire to 
grow richer through economy. The rich own the machinery 
of production, and it has brought them large annual returns ; 



33 

the more of such machinery they have o\vned, the larger has 
been their income. They have endeavored to increase their 
incomes by the creation of still more of this machinery. At 
last the machinery of production increases the supply of pro- 
ducts beyond the limit of consumption, — a limit fixed, as 
before stated, as to the poor mainly by their ability, and as to 
the rich by their willingness to spend. More products are 
created than are called for. In the competition to sell, the 
profits of the seller disappear. Then at last the desire to 
increase the machinery of production disappears, — even the 
desire to keep the existing machinery at work, — laborers are 
thrown out of employment, and their capacity for consumption 
is greatly decreased thereby ; the capitalists fail to receive their 
usual income, and begin to feel that they must reduce their 
expenses. Thus the demand for the products of labor is 
diminished on every hand, distress and discontent are wide- 
spread, factories stand idle, railroads and steamships have few 
passengers and light freights ; capital is abundant, but unable 
to employ itself at a profit ; in a word, " hard times " have 
been brought about through over-production. Are we not 

travelling on this road at present ? 

U. H. C. 
22d Oct., 1883. 



The preceding communication was soon followed by another which 
appeared in the New York " Nation," of Feb. 21, 1884. 

THE CAUSE OF THE DEPRESSION IN BUSINESS. 

SiR^ — 111 your issue of this week you state that the present 
depression in trade has been caused by abnormal activity and 
over-production in certain branches of business, and that what 
is needed is a " redistribution of employments." This is in 
accordance with tlie accepted theories of political economy. 
If we would accept these theories, we must believe that the 
cause of the present troubles lies in the fact that we have been 

5 



34 

busy producing the wrong articles ; that we have produced 
what was not wanted, and have failed to produce wliat was 
wanted ; and that all we liave to do now is to turn round and 
produce the things that are really called for, and all will be 
well again. The difficulty with tliis theory is, that it requires 
us to believe that there are certain wants and demands now 
unsatisfied and unsupplied, not because of the lack of means to 
purchase, but because of the scarcity of the thing to be pur- 
chased. But if there are any productions of human labor that 
are now scarce, they must command high prices and furnish 
large profits to tlie producers ; and any capital that miglit now 
be unemployed would be hastening to secure a share of those 
profits. As a matter of fact, however, there is in tliis country 
at the present time an immense amount of unemployed capi- 
tal, and there are no symptoms that even the shrewdest and 
most enterprising of its owners have any idea that there is 
any possible field in whicli they can employ it with profit to 
themselves. 

If, however, we consider the cause of our present troubles to 
be an abnormal activity and over-production, not in certain clas- 
ses of business, but in business generally ; if we consider that 
the wealthy and thrifty among our people have endeavored to 
do more business than the condition of the country permitted, 
to create more productions than the pecuniary ability of the 
rest of the community enabled them to consume, we have an 
explanation that fits the present state of the facts. A large 
portion of the community have l>een eager to accumulate 
wealth, to make profitable investments, to save up their in- 
come or their earnings, and put them where they should bring 
annual returns. People have seen that factories produced for 
their owners large profits, and they have forthwith proceeded 
to build new factories in the hope of securing for themselves 
similar profits. In like manner capital has hastened to build 
new railroads, to erect new warehouses, and to extend and 
multiply all branches of trade and business. But the fact has 
been overlooked that profitable business and profitable produc- 
tion cannot be increased indefinitely without a corresponding 
increase of customers and consumers. While there has been 



35 

recently an immense increase of production, the wages of the 
poor, which fix the limit of their ability to purchase and to 
consume, have not been largely increased, and the rich have 
sought rather an increased accumulation of wealth than a fuller 
gratification of their daily wants and desires. Thus, instead 
of one factory producing and selling at a profit a supply of pro- 
ducts that rather fell short of than exceeded the demand for 
them, we have had two or three factories producing a supply 
much in excess of the demand, and consequently competing 
with each other in the endeavor to sell their surplus stock, and 
selling it at no profit or at a loss. Finally the factories have 
cut down the wages of their employees or have dismissed them 
altogether, and the capacity of the poor to purchase and to con- 
sume has thus been largely taken away from them, while the 
inclination of the rich in that direction has been lessened by 
the loss of their usual dividends, and thus the original mischief 
of over-production has been increased and intensified. 

Briefly, the theory here suggested is this, — that our people 
have been trying to invest more capital profitably, to do more 
business, than their capacity and inclination to consume made 
possible ; and that the result has been to seriously reduce that 
capacity and inclination, and to destroy the annual returns 
that capital hopes to receive from its investments and from 

business. 

U. H. C. 
Boston, Feb. 9, 1884. 

This communication elicited a response from one "B.J. S." of Cincin- 
nati, which was printed in the " Nation " of March 6, 1884. The follow- 
ing answer to " B. J. S.," was declined by the " Nation," on the ground 
that " to print it, with a chance of prolonging the controversy, would be 
just now an inconvenience." 



36 



GENERAL OVER-PRODUCTION. 

SiR^ — Your correspondent " B. J. S.," in your issue of 
Marcli 6, while admitting the existence of a " general over- 
production," at the present time, claims that a remedy for our 
distress might be reached through a " redistribution of em- 
ployments " that shovxld divert the labor recently thrown out 
of employment to the pi'oduction of food, — an article of which, 
as he admits, there is now no scarcity, but which the laborers 
have not sufficient means to purchase, and which, as " B. J. S." 
assumes, they might and should now produce for themselves. 
It must be admitted that such a change of employment might 
help those discharged factory hands and mechanics who could 
surmount the obstacles that lie in the way of their supporting 
themselves by agriculture. But many of them would perish in 
the attempt, and those who succeeded would find themselves in 
a much less comfortable condition in life than that which they 
had previously enjoyed. They would have gone back to that 
earlier state of society in which each family produced its own 
food and clothed itself in its own homespun. If we should all 
go back to that condition of society, the present difficulties of 
over-production, either general or special, would be unknown. 
Such ah abandonment of the present division of labor, such a 
return to the old system under whicli every man supplied his 
own wants, would indeed be in one sense a " redistribution of 
employments ; " but it is not such a redistribution as the politi- 
cal economist looks forward to for our relief from our present 
troubles, and it is to be hoped that we may find some way 
out of those troubles without being driven to it. Except on the 
above point " B. J. S." asserts nothing that I am not willing 
in substance to admit, — he admits the existence at present 
of a " general over-production." This fact it was a main 
purpose of my communication to maintain, in opposition to the 
accepted dogmas of the political economists. 

U. H. C. 

Boston, March 7, 1884. 



37 



The author's last effort has been the following, which found a 
resting place in the editorial waste basket of the " Nation." 

TPIE FALLACY OF MILL'S ARGUMENT AGAINST THE 
POSSIBILITY OF GENERAL OVER-PRODUCTION. 

Sir, — In your issue of March 13, you say, " It would seem, 
in spite of all that political economists tell us, as though the 
world had at last reached a state of general over-production, 
and not merely of disproportionate production." All that po- 
litical economists have to tell us on this subject is based on 
the argument of Mill to prove the impossibility of what used 
to be called a " general glut." The apparent strength of this 
argument and the weight of Mill's name and reputation have 
caused his conclusions to be accepted as fundamental truths ; 
but if, as you intimate, his conclusions do not agree with the 
facts, it may be well to look for the flaw in his argument. 
That flaw can, I think, be discovered and exposed. 

Mill argues that no man produces any article unless he 
wishes to consume it himself or to exchange it for something 
else which he wishes to consume, and that, consequently, 
production can never as a whole exceed the demand for con- 
sumption. He who asserts the possibility of a general over- 
production is necessarily involved, according to Mill, in the 
absurdity of believing that large numbers of people will go on 
producing articles, which they do not want either to use them- 
selves, or to exchange for other articles which they do wish to 
use. Mill says that the error of those who oppose his views 
lies, to quote his own words, " in not perceiving that, though 
all who have an equivalent to give might be fully provided 
with every consumable article which they desire, the fact that 
they go on adding to the production proves that this is not 
actually the case." 

Just at this point, as it seems to me, the fallacy lies. 
Mill overlooks the fact that a very large portion of the produc- 
tion of to-day is prompted, not by the desire of the producers 



to acquire any " consumable articles," but by their desire to 
gain new productive investments. They wish, not to consume, 
but to grow rich. The wish to sell their cotton cloth, for in- 
stance, not that they may apply the proceeds of the sale to the 
purchase of other " consumable articles," but that they may 
with those proceeds build new factories which shall produce 
still more cotton cloth ; or, if they perceive that, by reason of 
the over-production of cotton cloth, such factories will not be 
profitable, they hold their funds idle and unemployed, waiting 
for a chance to make some other investment that will promise 
the return of regular profits. They produce " consumable ar- 
ticles," not that they may exchange them for other consumable 
articles, but that they may increase the machinery for the pro- 
duction of consumable articles, and thereby, of course, increase 
largely that production. The fact, then, that men go on add- 
ing to production, does not, as Mill claims, prove that they 
desire some consumable article which they are not already 
provided with, — they may have no such desire, and the sole 
motive which impels them to go on producing may be a desire 
to gain the power to produce still more. Thus the limit to 
production, which Mill fancied he saw in the failure of the 
desire to consume, disappears, — production is seen to be 
caused in great measure by a desire to increase production ; 
general over-production becomes, not an impossibility, but a 
natural and probable result of the general thrift, of the gen- 
eral desire of our people to make profitable investments, — 
and theory is made to conform to the observed facts. 

U. H. C. 

Boston, March 16, 1884. 



The author hopes that any who have taken the trouble to 
read the preceding pages will be satisfied that an earnest and 
long-continued, though as yet unsuccessful, attempt has been 
made to convince the public of the correctness of his views 
and theories. That these views, if correct, are important, is 



39 

vouched for by Mill himself, who says, speaking of the ques- 
tion of the possibility of a general over-production of com- 
modities : " The point is fundamental ; any difference of 
opinion on it involves radically different conceptions of polit- 
ical economy, especially in its practical aspect. On the one 
view, we have only to consider how a sufficient production 
may be combined with the best possible distribution ; but, 
on the other, there is a third thing to be considered : how 
a market can be created for produce, or how production can 
be limited to the capabilities of the market." Still, as we 
have seen, our leading papers and magazines have not been 
willing to encourage the discussion of this subject. The author 
has not been alone in his efforts to ventilate it. Two other 
gentlemen, arriving at their conclusions independently of the 
author and of each other, have had experiences very similar to 
those before recited. Mr. Fred. B. Hawley, of Brooklyn, 
N. Y., publislied in the " National Quarterly Review " for July, 
1879, an article entitled " The Ratio of Capital to Consump- 
tion," which contained views very similar to those presented 
in the preceding pages. This article was followed in the 
number of the same Review for October, 1879, by another 
entitled " The Rationale of Panics ; " and Mr. Hawley pub- 
lished, in 1882, a book entitled " Capital and Population," in 
wiiich he elaborated his views at greater length. Mr. Edward 
F. Sweet, formerly of Chicago, but now residing in Pittsburgh, 
Pa., has also endeavored to gain a public hearing for the ex- 
position of similar views regarding general over-production. 
His principal article on the subject appeared in the " Chicago 
Times" of April 26, 1880. What other gentlemen may have 
been laboring in the same field the author of this pamphlet 
does not know. It should also be stated that Prof. Francis 
Bowen has advanced views in many respects similar to those 
advocated in these pages ; as may be seen by consulting his 
chapter (c. 17) on " The rate of profit as affected by tlie 
limited extent of the field for the employment of capital : 
The theory of gluts " in his " American Political Economy," 
3d ed. (1863). See also "Principles of Political Economy," 
by Prof. William Roscher, of the University of Leipzig, 




40 014 060 462 8 



Am. ed., translated by Jolin J. Lalor (1882), Sect. 213, 
"Equilibrium between production and consumption;" Sect. 
215, " Necessity of the proper simultaneous development of 
production and consumption;" Sects. 216 and 217, "Com- 
mercial crises in general ; " Sect. 220, " When saving is 
injurious ; " Sect. 221, " Limits to the saving of capital." 



It may be well to close this pamphlet with a short summary 
of the propositions which it has been the author's object to 
assert and maintain. These propositions are : — 

1. That saving is not always and under all circumstances 
beneficial. 

2. That consumption and production are not necessarily 
equal, i. e., not rigidly equal, but liable to fluctuations which 
may disturb their normal condition of equality. 

3. That there may be general over-production, and that the 
arguments, which have been supposed to prove that it cannot 
exist, are fallacious. 

4. That excessive saving with a view to profitable invest- 
ment tends to cause general over-production. 

5. That general over-production, when thus brought about, 
results in a reduction of consumption, and consequently in a 
reduction of production. 

6. That when the amount of production is thus diminished, 
there is necessarily less work for producers, and, consequently, 
idleness among the laboring classes, dull business for the 
commercial classes, and diminished profit to be derived from 
capital, — in other words, we have commercial distress or 
" hard times." 

The final conclusion of the whole argument is this : that 
saving, instead of being, as we have been taught, always and 
necessarily a good, may be carried so far as to be an evil, — so 
far as to cause distress among all classes, the rich as well as 
the poor. 



^^37 



c.n 



SUPPLEMENT 

TO 

EXCESSIYE SAYING A CAUSE OF 
COMMERCIAL DISTRESS." 

CONTAINING MORE RECENT COMMUNICATIONS ON 
THE SAME SUBJECT. 



The following articles, which have been written since the pamphlet on 
" Excessive Saving a Cause op Commercial Distress " was published, 
are now printed as containing the author's latest and, as he is inclined to think, 
best statements of the theory which he has endeavored to maintain. 

Uriel H. Crocker. 
Boston, June 20, 1885. 



THE TRUE CAUSE OP THE HARD TIMES. 

To THE Editor of " The Nation." 

Sir, — It is generally assumed that there is no limit to the 
extent to which income-producing wealth may be accumulated. 
This is indeed practically true so far as the accumulation of 
such wealth by an individual is concerned ; but when the pos- 
sible amount of accumulation of income-producing wealth by 
the whole world is considered, we find that the problem involves 
a new element, and that a limit to that amount really exists. 
The chief kind of income-producing wealth known to modern 
civilization consists of the machinery or instruments of produc- 
tion and transportation. In other words, the principal way in 
which men at the present day can so use capital that it will 
bring them annual returns is by employing it in the creation of 
such machinery and instruments, — by building factories, rail- 
roads, steamboats, etc. 



44 

Then, as the products accumulated in the warehouses, we might 
next expect to see the factories, in their competition to sell 
their products, reducing their selling prices till at last they 
would be ready to sell at or below the cost of production. Then 
there would naturally come a reduction of the wages of the 
work-people, as the result of an attempt to reduce the cost of 
the products below the price at which they could be sold, or the 
factories might stop work altogether till their accumulated prod- 
ucts could be disposed of. Then, as the wages of the work- 
people were cut down or ceased altogether, there would arise 
distress among the laboring classes, and as the natural con- 
sequence of such distress, strikes and labor riots. At the same 
time that the poor were losing their wages, the rich would 
necessarily be losing their dividends from their factories, rail- 
roads, and other investments; and these causes would force all 
classes to economize, and thereby the consumption of the prod- 
ucts of the factories and the work of the railroads in the trans- 
portation of both passengers and freight would be largely 
diminished, the business of the trader and mechanic would fall 
away, and hotels, theatres, and places of amusement would 
languish. There would be an appearance of plenty in the mar- 
kets, which would be filled with an abundance of the products of 
the field and of the factory ; everybody would have something, 
either goods or labor, that he wished to sell, but comparatively 
few persons would be both able and willing to purchase. There 
would be a world full of factories lying idle, of railroads not 
paying their running expenses, of stores and warehouses stand- 
ing empty, of banks overflowing with funds for which no in- 
vestment could be found, and finally, and worst of all, there 
would be a world full of men and women able and anxious to 
engage in useful labor, but forced to sit idle and starving in the 
midst of the abundance by which they were surrounded. Is 
not all this exactly what we have seen in recent years and are 
seeing to-day? 

In conclusion, do not the observed facts all agree with the 
theory that the hard times have been caused by an excessive 
desire to acquire income-producing wealth, by overdomg the 
creation of the machinery and instruments of production and 



45 

transportation ? And does not this theory afford, what other 
theories have failed to do, a full and simple explanation of the 
causes of the distress from which the whole business world is 
suffering to-day ? 

U. H. C. 

Boston, Feb. 16, 1885. 

The above appeared in the New York " Nation" of Feb. 25, 1885. 



THE CAUSE OF THE "HARD TIMES." 

To THE Editors of the Boston "Daily Advertiser." 

That the whole civilized world is now suffering from " hard 
times," is a proposition which no one will deny. It is gen- 
erally admitted also that the most noticeable features of the 
present hard times are the excessive supply of products of every 
kind and the impossibility of finding full employment for fac- 
tories and for workmen. In the case of an individual such 
results are usually caused by past extravagance ; and people 
readily jump to the conclusion that the world's present distress 
must be due to a similar cause. Indeed the various theories 
which have been advanced to account for the hard times may 
generally be reduced to this proposition, — that the world is 
suffering the results of its past extravagance or waste. 

When one says that the world has been extravagant or waste- 
ful, he must mean that it has employed too large a proportion 
of its labor in the production of articles of daily comfort and of 
luxury, or of articles useless for any good purpose, and that it 
has neglected to maintain and make due additions to its capital, 
— that it has spent its income in high living or in folly, and 
has not kept up its principal. The world's principal or capital 
consists in the main of its machinery and instruments of pro- 
duction and distribution, — of its factories, railroads, ships, 
warehouses, etc. ; and unless a large part of the world's labor 
had been in the past and were now yearly devoted to the crea- 
tion and maintenance of these things, the civilization of to-day, 
with its comforts and its luxuries, would not be possible. The 



46 

remainder of the world's labor, not devoted to these purposes, 
has been, and is, employed in supplying the articles called for 
by what the political economist terms "unproductive consump- 
tion." When, therefore, it is said that the world has been ex- 
travagant and wasteful, it must necessarily be intended that 
too much labor has been expended in meeting the demands of 
unproductive consumption, and too little in building and repair- 
ing factories, railroads, ships, and warehouses and the other 
machinery and instruments of production and distribution, 
which consequently must be supposed to have become worn 
out and dilapidated, or, in case of their destruction by fire, not 
to have been replaced. If the world has applied a due propor- 
tion of its labor to the maintenance and increase of its princi- 
pal, it cannot properly be said to have been extravagant, even 
though it has consumed un productively all the remaining prod- 
ucts of labor ; for human labor can have no other final object 
than the promotion of the comfort and happiness of mankind. 
We have seen, then, what must necessarily be the character 
of the results of past extravagance and waste. If, however, 
we look about us, not only are no such results apparent to-day, 
but the results actually existing are of an entirely different 
character. Instead of finding that our factories, railroads, ships, 
and warehouses have been neglected and suffered to become 
ruinous, or that they are insufficient in numbers, we now find 
that all these things are in excellent condition, and that the 
present embarrassment arises from the evident fact that there 
are not too few, but too many, of them. This condition of af- 
fairs cannot have had its origin in past extravagance and waste, 
— we cannot suffer in this way by reason of having used up 
all our income and neglected our principal. The results point 
clearly to causes of an entirely opposite character, — they sug- 
gest that the world has been devoting too much, rather than 
too little, of its labor to the creation of the machinery and in- 
struments of production and distribution ; that by reason of 
the desire of mankind to acquire such machinery and such in- 
struments, in order to profit by the annual income ordinarily 
accruing to the owners thereof, the world has devoted itself too 
largely to the accumulation of such property ; that the world's 



47 

readiness to produce has been out of all due proportion to its 
readiness to consume ; . in fine, that not excessive spending, 
but excessive thrift, has been the real cause of the present 
distress. 

U. H. C. 
Boston, April 12, 1885. 

The above appeared in the Boston " Daily Advertiser" of April 15, 1885, 



WHAT MAKES THE "BAD TIMES." 

To THE Editor of the "Herald." 

In your paper of this morning, in answer to the above ques- 
tion, you say that the "bad times" have been caused by 
" overproduction," and that that in its turn has been caused by 
protective tariffs, which have interfered with the working of the 
" great law of supply and demand." This may appear plausi- 
ble at first sight, but it would seem that those who attribute 
our present troubles to protective tariffs are bound to point out 
more definitely and more in detail than you have attempted to 
do, how such tariffs can cause overproduction, not only in the 
countries where they exist, but also in free-trade England, 
which has been suffering from bad times as much as the United 
States. This, I believe, you will find it difficult to do. 

Another cause, the whole working of which may easily be 
traced, can, I think, be suggested for the bad times. Why not 
attribute the overproduction from which the whole civilized 
world appears to be suffering to-day, simply to the excessive 
number of factories that have been set in operation ; and why 
not account for the fact that so many factories have been built, 
by that general desire for the accumulation of income-producing 
wealth which is prevalent in all the countries which have been 
suffering from the overproduction ? This would afford a 
simple and easy solution of the whole mystery. If the world, 
in its desire to " grow rich," builds so many factories that their 
capacity of production is far in excess of the world's readiness 



48 

to consume their products, the natural and necessary result 
will be a general overproduction of those products. If the poor, 
by reason of the smallness of their wages, have but little money 
to spend in the purchase of the products of the factories, and if 
the rich, being inclined to put a large part of their incomes 
into new investments, are willing to spend but little on factory 
products, it is evident that the limit to the number of profitable 
factories will soon be reached. Indeed, as soon as that limit 
has been reached, and as soon as too many factories have been 
built, and there begins to be in consequence an excess of prod- 
ucts, all the factories, the old ones as well as the new, will 
cease to be profitable, for they will begin to compete with each 
other in the attempt to get rid of their superfluous products ; 
they will sell at the cost or even below the cost of production ; 
they will cut down the wages of their operatives ; they will work 
on half time or close up altogether, — they will do, in fact, just 
what we are hearing of their doing to-day all over this country 
and in Europe. 

In answer to the question, "What makes the bad times?" 
my suggestion would be that it is the fact that the world's de- 
sire to get the profits arising from the manufacture of products 
has run ahead of its readiness to spend its money in purchasing 
and consuming those products ; or, to put it more simply and 
broadly, that the world has proved itself more ready to produce 

than to consume. 

U. H. C. 

Boston, April 7, 1885. 

The above appeared in the Boston "Evening Herald" of April 13, 

1885. 



49 



THE BUSINESS FUTURE. 

To THE Editor of the " Herald." 

There is at the present time much speculation as to the 
future of business, and we are hearing many prophecies of 
better times soon to come. We all hope that these prophecies 
will be verified by the facts, but we should not delude ourselves 
with unfounded hopes. It is best in this matter to know the 
truth, whether it be pleasant or unpleasant. I therefore ven- 
ture to suggest some considerations which seem to indicate 
that the commercial distress from which we suffered in 1884 is 
likely to continue and be intensified in 1885. 

During the past summer and fall very many of our factories 
either reduced the number of laborers employed by them or 
stopped work altogether. They found that the demand for 
their products did not keep up with the supply, and they met 
the difficulty by attempting to reduce the supply to an equality 
with the demand. But one result of this course which our 
factories have taken has not been much considered. When 
thousands of laboring men are thrown out of employment, and 
thereby deprived of their regular wages, they necessarily cut 
down their expenses and abstain from purchasing many fac- 
tory products whichthey would otherwise buy for clothing, house- 
hold use, etc. If the manufacturers of cloth, for instance, have 
stopped their factories because they have found that they were 
producing more cloth than there was a demand for, the mere 
fact that many laborers have, by reason of that stoppage, been 
thrown out of employment will tend to decrease still further 
the already insufficient demand for cloth, and will also have a 
similar effect upon the demand for many other articles, the 
makers of which have been pursuing the same course as the 
makers of cloth. If, by reason of the stoppage of the factories, 
the corporations owning them cease to pay dividends, the 
stockholders in those corporations will begin also to curtail 
their expenses, and the demand for the products of labor will 
thereby be still further reduced. Of the stoppage of factories 
we have already had many instances. We are beginning to 

7 



50 

hear of the cessation of dividends. During the year now just 
begun we ought to feel the effect of the loss of wages by 
the unemployed laborers and of the loss of dividends by the 
wealthier classes. If, during this year, large numbers of the 
laboring classes are forced to practise the strictest economy, 
and if the richer people economize also, because they find their 
incomes diminishing, must we not necessarily have a greater 
stagnation of business than we have yet felt ? Shall we not 
find that our railroads are not doing sufficient business, either 
in passengers or in freight, to return them any profit ? Will 
not our hotels suffer because people will feel so poor that they 
will abstain from travel ? Will the masons, carpenters, and 
painters find any one ready to undertake the erection of new 
buildings after those now commenced have been completed ? 
It would seem, indeed, that many men in every department of 
labor and business, in addition to those already idle, must soon 
be thrown out of employment ; and every man thus forced into 
idleness will intensify the existing mischief by lessening still 
further the demand for the products of labor. 

We see, then, that there is at the present time a tendency of 
things to go from bad to worse, and it is not easy to discover 
what is to counteract this tendency and cause matters to begin 
to mend. The " hard times" that culminated in this country 
in 1878 found relief in the call that Europe made upon us in 
1879 for vast quantities of our crops. Large sums of money 
were thereby distributed among our farmers, who were thus 
supplied with the means of purchasing all sorts of products of 
labor ; and our railroads, our factories, and our merchants were 
thereby given employment and business. Now, no such relief 
seems to be at hand. Large quantities of our crops will no 
doubt go to Europe, but the produce of our soil has this year 
been so abundant that our farmers, in their competition to sell, 
have been forced to dispose of their produce at prices which 
will leave them little or no profit. When the farmer counted 
up his gains at the end of 1884, he was fortunate if he found 
that his income had exceeded his expenses. Instead of launch- 
ing out into new expenditures, as our farmers did in 1879 and 
1880, they are likely to feel in 1885 that they must retrench ; 



51 

and that retrenchment will mean just so much less employment 
for labor — just so much less profits for the capital that em- 
ploys labor in the production of the articles that farmers are 
accustomed to buy. 

There certainly have been of late many encouraging symp- 
toms in the course of business, but it is not easy to discover 
that anything has yet happened or is likely soon to happen g 

that can avert the downward course above suggested. If there 1 

are any causes at work that are likely to have this effect, it is 
to be hoped that some one will point them out. 

U. H. C. 

Boston, Jan. 13, 1885. 

The above appeared in the Boston " Sunday Herald" of Feb. 8, 1885. 




/ 



LIBRl 



0j 



Hollinger C 
pH8.5 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



014 060 462 8 <9r 



HoUinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



